Thursday, May 31, 2012

Indianapolis: CHRISTY SHAFFER steals a Mothers Infant, Murders Infant And Walks Free

I want you to look at theses Photos, read the narrative KNOW THAT Christy Shaffer her Husband were NEVER CHARGED for Murder Please visit Alissa Cries For Justice Website to Find out how You can Demand Justice For this little Girl and Her Mother.

Alissa was taken from her mommy after her father died in car crash. Babies Belong with their mommies. Alissa and Alissa's mommy, hell holds a special place for those who did this. Alissa's final day (35 photos) this baby was dead before she reached the hospital!


The Homicide of Alissa remains an open Murder case, and all of the facts point directly to Christy Shaffer's beating Alissa to DEATH.
The Murder case and investigation should be reopened and presented once again before a State Grand Jury to determine if a Murder indictment should be issued against Christy Shaffer.

View the rest of these horrendous photos of inhumane abuse and murder of this baby girl here –>>

Please Visit and 'LIKE':
& Please Comment on

Baby Alissa Cries 4 Justice

Implore, insist and demand that Greg Zoeller, Indiana Attorney General reopen the investigation into the homicide of 16 month old Alissa Guernsey, who was beaten to death on March 28, 2009 and abused by her mother's cousin, Christy Shaffer, for 3 months before she was killed. Christy Shaffer was never charged with any murder charge; therefore, Double Jeopardy does not apply to a reopened criminal case.

View Christy Shaffer's Plea Deal
Christy Shaffer, who fatally beat Alissa ,was only convicted of a singular count of a Class B Felony,
Neglect of a Dependent, and only served 77 days in jail for what is clearly documented and presented
to the Prosecutor as the homicide of an innocent baby.
Judge J. Scott VanDerbeck valued Alissa's life at just 77 days of incarceration.

The Statute of Limitations for murder NEVER expires, and Christy Shaffer will always be exposed to facing a Felony Murder charge. Two medical examiners determined at autopsy that Alissa's injuries prior to her death could only be caused by a prolonged pattern of child abuse.
After Christy struck Alissa's head so many times that the fatal head injuries caused Alissa to lose consciousness, her lifeless body was strapped in her car seat as Christy Shaffer casually proceeded to go pick up a movie rental, and go through a McDonald's Drive-thru window to buy 'Happy Meals' for the other children in the car. Christy then drove home and carried Alissa's lifeless body into her house in Topeka, La Grange County, Indiana.
After beating Alissa to death, Christy never called 911 herself. Instead, Christy Shaffer phoned her brother, who was an EMT, hours later after returning home from her 'errands'. When he arrived, her brother found Baby Alissa's body to be 'cold, unresponsive, with no heartbeat'. Her brother then performed CPR and phoned 911, who then responded to Christy Shaffer's home and continued to try revive Alissa.
Alissa was then rushed to the local hospital, where CPR, defibrillators, and every possible means of emergency care was provided in an effort to save Alissa's life. After 45 minutes, despite the heroic efforts by the Emergency Room Staff, Alissa was pronounced dead, and autopsy reports indicateAlissa had been dead for hours before arriving at the Emergency Room. This story of injustice and judicial corruption only begins here....

Christy Shaffer still be charged for the murder of Alissa, despite her Plea Deal for Neglecting Alissa
Nothing in the laws of Indiana or Christy Shaffer's plea deal of 'Neglect of a Dependant', prohibits her from being charged with other counts of child abuse for her 3 month pattern of child abuse of Alissa prior to March 28th, 2009. Christy's Plea Deal does not protect her from any form of Double Jeopardy of any charges for which she was never charged or indicted for. This clearly leaves her as a person of interest, a suspect, and the individual solely responsible for the DEATH of Alissa.

'Neglect of a Dependant' is a charge when the child suffers serious bodily injury, NOT the DEATH of that child.
Christy was undercharged and Prosecutor Jeffery W. Wible 'claimed' he could not link Christy's beating to Alissa's death, despite the Indiana State Police and the Medical Examiner's Reports, which when submitted to the Prosecution, clearly and unequivocally stated that the DEATH was a HOMICIDE. Wible failed to represent the citizens of the State of Indiana when he chose NOT to provide the empaneled Grand Jury with the option to have Christy Shaffer charged with any murder charge. Many of the Grand Jury members remain stunned that they were never given the option of indicting Christy Shaffer for murder.

This type of 'discretion' by a Prosecutor is a 'Fraud upon the Court'. It is inherently unfair and illegal. The Homicide of Alissa remains an open Murder case, and all of the facts point directly to Christy Shaffer's beating Alissa to DEATH. The Murder case and investigation should be reopened and presented once again before a State Grand Jury to determine if a Murder indictment should be issued against Christy Shaffer.

Labels: Alissa Guernsey, Attorney General, Christy Shaffer, Greg Zoeller, Indiana, Jeffery W. Wible, Judge J. Scott VanDerbeck Links to this post

Monday, May 28, 2012

Courts Gave Custody of my Daughter to an Admitted and Convicted Batterer- and Have Denied My Daughter and I any meaningful Contact since 2000

Courts Gave Custody of my Daughter to an Admitted and Convicted Batterer- and Have Denied My Daughter and I any meaningful Contact since 2000

July 31, 2000 in Topeka, Kansas

July 31, 2000.

Monday, May 21, 2012

U.S. FAMILY COURTS SACRIFICING MOTHERS & CHILDREN all the usual suspects; Guardian ad Litem’s, Psychologists, Case Managers, Custody Evaluators, Access Visitation Supervisors, Parenting Coordinators, and *Therapeutic Jurisprudence

Courtesy American Mothers Political Party   Dear Court Whores – Your Days Are Numbered! We Have Had Enough – We Will Expose Each and Every One of You, Your Child Trafficking Days $$$$ Are No Longer Secret. We Are Silent No More!

[This is an ongoing investigative report by Keith Harmon Snow of Conscious Being Alliance. Please visit link for the entire 60+ pages and continuous updates of Court Corruption by all the usual suspects; Guardian ad Litem’s, Psychologists, Case Managers, Custody Evaluators, Access Visitation Supervisors, Parenting Coordinators, and *Therapeutic Jurisprudence.] 

* SF Peter Jamison's "California Family Courts Helping Pedophiles, Batterers Get Child Custody"

AMPP Is Proud To Support And Encourage All Journalists And Media Who Courageously Do Investigative Reports Exposing The Judicial Profit And Big Industry Of Battered Mothers And Abused Children.

Planned, Organized, And Premeditated: This Is The Mafia of Family Courts.

* PBS Documentary: Breaking The Silence; Children’s Stories
* Domestic Violence Continued
* Family Court Crisis; Our Children At Risk
* No way out But One


Family Courts Behind an Epidemic of Pedophilia & Judicial Abuse

by keith harmon snow

First publication: 01 May 2012
Edits & Revision: 03 May 2012 
Edits & Revision: 17 May 2012

(*The article's original title "SCREW THE BITCH" -- based on a book designed to destroy protective mothers -- was unacceptably offensive to the author.  Revision on May 17 was to clarify 'Father's Manifesto' vs. 'Father's Rights'.)

A five month investigation reveals an epidemic of violence and corruption facilitated by Family Courts in the United States.  Children all over the United States are being taken from their protective mothers and delivered to abusers.  Behind this epidemic of judicial abuse are organized networks involved in racketeering and corruption, channeling and disappearing billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayers money every year.  Insurance companies are being defrauded by medical and mental health professionals rewarded handsomely for producing quack studies that criminalize loving mothers and protect abusive fathers.  With clear evidence of racketeering and corruption, high court judges and insider lawyers use and abuse the Family Courts system to destroy protective mothers and deliver life sentences of suffering to innocent children.  Rich, poor, middle-class... No child in America is safe.

Little did they know, the worst was yet to come.  Sunny Kelley and Lori Handrahan are just two mothers in two states in the country whose cases provide irrefutable evidence of judicial abuse and pedophile trafficking through Family Courts.  Their court cases went straight from horrible to hell. 
Despite solid documentation of judicial corruption, cronyism, state social service agency abuse, misconduct or dismissal by police, and massive profiteering by officials who are preying on families and children, even the Federal Bureau of Investigation is mute.
Just when Sunny and Lori thought it couldn't get worse, it did.

The cover of the woman-hating 'Father's Rights' book Screw the Bitch.

The cover of the woman-hating 'Father's Rights' book Screw the Bitch.

As I write this story, the family court system has already delivered Sunny Kelley's son and Lori Handrahan's daughter to alleged sex abusers who appear to be part of sex crime networks.  Both mothers are fighting for their children's lives, at the expense of their own.  They have been slandered, abused, ridiculed, harassed, ignored, humiliated, threatened and attacked.  They have been financially devastated.
With the incredible love of a protective mother for her baby they have fought back fiercely, but the more they have fought the more the system has restricted, hammered and punished them.  Every move they made has brought further retaliation upon them.  And they are not alone.  
Like other mothers persecuted by the Family Court system, Sunny and Lori have been psychologically and emotionally tortured, and it's still happening.  It is the same story for Susan Skipp (Tittle v. Tittle) and Sandra MacVicar (Buggy v. Buggy) and Marlene Debek (Bhatia v. Debek) and Lisa Foley (Foley v. Foley) and many more.  
Some of the protective mothers I have talked to tell stories of their children sleeping terrified in the same bed, living in constant fear of their father sexually abusing them.  They talk about their child and their neighbor's child being dressed and undressed in costumes and made to touch each other for the baby-sitting father's pleasure.  Evidence has been provided to the authorities, and nothing is done.
Unlike some mothers who have been forced to live on the streets or in their cars or those committed to mental health asylums as a result of fraudulent court psychological evaluations, protective mothers like Sunny Kelley and Lori Handrahan have not succumbed to the institutionalized corruption and criminality served on them in an effort to silence them, destroy them and deliver their children to the abusers.  They are broke.  They are exhausted.  They are depressed and disillusioned.  They are still fighting.  And they are courageous beyond belief. 
How can our society have let them down so badly?
The legal systems in Maine and Connecticut have given Lori and Sunny and mothers like them the proverbial bitch-slap unceremoniously reserved for any mother in America who stands up for her children and herself against a misogynist and patriarchal culture dominated by shrill demagogues.  Worst of all, Sunny and Lori's pleas for help have fallen on deaf ears: when they tell their stories no one believes them.

Continue Reading this Report in its entirety with updates here.



* "I think this [change of names] was done to protect the court from being exposed and also to protect the judges whose actions are damnable," said Dr. Eli Newberger. "This is like Soviet Russia, but it's happening in the United States, and people's rights are being trampled on by people in power who can only maintain their power through the conventions of secrecy."

* "This is how abusive and narcissistic men work the family court system to destroy the lives of their ex-partners and their children. The documentary film No Way Out But One tells the story of Holly Collins -- a woman just like Lori Handrahan and Sunny Kelley -- a protective mother persecuted by the family court system in Minnesota for trying to protect her children. A family court in that state had ignored Holly Collin's complaints of domestic violence, and the physical evidence of serious child abuse, and had given full custody of the children to the abusive ex-partner. Holly Collins became an international fugitive when she grabbed her children and went on the run. Collins fled the United States in 1994, and she became the first U.S. citizen to gain asylum in the Netherlands. The FBI tracked Collins down. The now grown children confirmed that their mother was not their kidnapper, but their savior."


"Most mothers heading down the divorce and custody road have no idea that they are destined for judicial entrapment, extortion, exploitation, and total loss. They don't want to upset the apple cart, appear to be contentious, or be judged guilty by association, as they follow well-meaning advice about going through a divorce in the family court system. Who wants to piss off the judge? Mothers convince themselves that it can't happen to them. Worse, no one believes a protective mother who says the court is not protecting her child"

* The problem is, what we are talking about here is a massive national and global epidemic in sex slavery and pedophilia that makes the Penn State University pedophile scandal look like a bonafidé success story. In that case, someone caught the thief with his hands in the cookie jar -- or the kiddie's nightie. Penn State was the tip of the top of the peak of the iceberg of sexual horrors that children are experiencing and mothers are fighting against. There is an ocean of evidence for any clear thinking person to see.

* There is little or no U.S. Department of Justice oversight of the billions of dollars in U.S. Department of Health and Human Services monies that are funding the black holes of Family Courts. The mass media is almost completely silent.

* Blueprint, the story goes like this: mother suspects father of sexual abuse against child; mother asks Family Court to investigate; court assigns psychologist to evaluate parents; psychologist declares that mother invented charges against father; mother is labeled with psychopathology based on discredited psychological theories; Family Court judge delivers child to abusive father.

* However, child sexual abuse and organized crime like this is not a matter of 'sometimes' failing dramatically. When even one child is taken away from his or her loving mother and delivered to a sex abuser it is a matter of ruining -- and sometimes ending -- a life.

* The problems with Family Courts pervade all levels of the federal and state systems, and no United States citizens are immune: rich and poor are exploited, only differently. At the root of the problem are these central truths: The five billion dollar a year budget of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provides a black hole of funding that filters millions of dollars down to 'gatekeepers' posted to key positions in Family Courts, state agencies, law-enforcement, and affiliated non-profit organizations that have learned how to milk the system;

  • Over the past 50 years, a destructive movement designed to win abusive fathers' access to their victims (women and children) has evolved into a hydra that has virtually overtaken judicial systems and social services, and it now uses them to persecute mothers and destroy families according to the otherwise reasonable dictate that access and visitation with both parents is in 'the best interest of the child'. This destructive movement is premised on and falsely bills itself as a movement for father's rights, thus further confusing the Family Courts landscape. 'Father's Rights' will be used to describe the movement designed by and for abusive fathers to further control, intimidate and abuse women and children.

The United States is both a domestic and an international hub for a trillion dollars a year sex industry in trafficking in women and children.

    Why are Family Courts Manhandling Good Mothers?

    Pretending to assist men to become responsible parents, federal programs operating under the banners of'Responsible Fatherhood', 'Access to Visitation Enforcement' (supervised visitation for noncustodial parents), and 'Child Support Enforcement' have perpetuated abuse of women and children through the family court system. These government programs are not producing responsible fathers, but motherless children, in order to advance the agenda of the so-called 'fathers' rights' movement.

    * Based on laws enacted by the Clinton Administration in the mid-1990's -- under the lobbying of the 'Contract on America' -- problems originate with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and programs like the Transitional Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Based on the financial and economic 'incentives', and with zero oversight or regulation, the system uses Family Courts and state agencies to destroy families.

    * The guardian ad litem serves a gatekeeper function placing lawyers in positions of power, manipulation and coercive control and this is not in the best interests of the child they are supposed to protect.   The corruption and judicial abuse being perpetrated through GAL systems in Pennsylvania has provoked federal lawsuits.  On March 16, 2012, a lawsuit was filed seeking to dismantle the GAL system in Lakawanna County, PA.


    One protective mother starts sobbing every time she talks about the calculated program used by courts and lawyers to abuse and destroy families -- and how they attacked and abused her and her prepubescent daughter. "I found my husband's lawyer's strategy when my husband left his notebook and I read it," says 'Mrs. Wilson'. "It said:
    1. Figure Out How to Shut the Bitch Up;

    2. Bleed the Bitch Dry Legally;

    3. Reunification Therapy;

    4. Trial."


    Who is Nicholas J. Sarno? How did Nicholas J. Sarno get involved in the millions of dollars business of supervising the visits between parents and children involved in highly contentious custody battles in Connecticut Family Courts? Why does Nicholas Sicinolfi alias Nick Sarno have at least five aliases and six names?


    For six days in December 2011, alone, Sunny Kelley was billed $3910.00 for 46 hours of supervision (@ $85 an hour) from the Nicholas J. Sarno & Company of Trumbull CT, one of the select agencies used by the CT Family Court system for mandated supervised visitations, but an agency with a very interesting history and questionable ties to court officials.

    Supervised visitation programs provide services to courts in visitation and custody disputes where a parent alleges physical or sexual abuse, domestic violence, or other harmful behaviors against a spouse or partner. Hailed as a welcome tool in the judicial management of high-conflict family court cases, such programs are garnering increased attention from legislatures, judges, and lawyers nationwide.

    Continue Reading this Report in it's entirety with updates here.

    Top 5 HHS Programs Endangering Women and Children - Billions Of Your Tax Dollars Fuel The Genocide Against Mothers And Her Children

    American Mothers Political Party

    Dear Court Whores – Your Days Are Numbered!

    Originally posted (huffpo)

    The so-called "War on Women" is raging, and billions of your tax dollars are being misused to fuel it via the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The solution is to remove the middle class from the welfare roles and do away with gender-based funding incentives.

    The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) program it created transformed welfare policy by drastically reducing and shifting federal assistance away from the homes of mothers and children and into the homes of violent offenders. In an article entitled "How Federal Welfare Funding Drives Judicial Discretion in Child-Custody Determinations and Domestic Relations Matters" fathers and rights activists Lary Holland and Jason Bottomsly explain that this policy has backfired because the incentives are structured so that the state will only benefit if children are removed from loving homes:

    "In essence, the federal guidelines wanted the states to function as collection agencies, recovering financial support from parents who had willfully abandoned their parental responsibilities to their children. The result, however, was different from the intent and has caused the state welfare programs to adjust their environment to have a greater need, which has caused the program to collect from willing parents that would ordinarily provide a loving environment for their children absent a court order limiting a parent's involvement. Despite the original intent of the IV-D welfare program, it now provides an incentive for the states to use their family courts to produce forcibly absent parents in order to increase the states' IV-D welfare caseload."

    These HHS policies created a new breed of dangerous Welfare Kings through HHS Office of Child Support Enforcement when it began subsidizing the homes and legal battles of the unfit, unwilling, and violent fathers. At the beginning of a custody case, only the offender is sick, but if one violent offender gets custody, the whole family needs treatment. Consequently, it is also not uncommonfor dozens of family court mental health and legal professionals onto the case to sustain his deadly custody rights through HHS programs.

    The top 5 HHS programs endangering women and children are:

    1. Child Support Enforcement (Access and Visitation Programs and Responsible Fatherhood Initiative) A 2011 report from the Office of the Inspector General demonstrates that the States are collecting child support, but not disbursing it to the children it is intended to benefit. So where is the money going? Although previous graduates include mass murderer D.C. Sniper John Muhammad, the 2012 HHS budget reflects President Obama's $1 billion endorsement of the fraud-riddled fatherhood industry.

    Using the virtually unregulated child support system as a vehicle and the father's will to evade prison time as collateral, the fathers are told they can risk their liberty and property attempting to pay down arrears, or alternatively, sue the mother for custody using a variety of federally funded "supports." Unlike the welfare programs for women and children which had restrictive income eligibility requirements, HHS Responsible Fatherhood program benefits are not needs based and are available to all fathers-even billionaires. Benefits from Responsible Fatherhood programs to abusers include:

    • Child support obligations are suspended
    • Free attorney representation in the family courts to fight for custody
    • Free housing
    • Direct cash incentives
    • Free groceries
    • Free car maintenance, gas, and other transportation costs
    • Free healthcare and dental care

    While many upstanding fathers honestly complain about TANF programs and the courts victimizing them, the dirty little secret in the fatherhood industry it that the grant recipients who train court personnel, social services, and child support personnel are often fathers rights groupslike the Fathers and Families Coalition, the Children's Rights Council(Founder David Levy sits on the board of the Supervised Visitation Network) and the National Fatherhood Institute.

    Clearly, judges understand the danger abusers pose, which is why their courts are guarded with armed deputies and not unarmed social workers. HHS programs are actually a deadly investment given that (a) abusive men win custody of their victims 70% of the time when they ask for it, and (b) regardless of the gender of the victim, it is a public safety issue when DOJ studies show men perpetrate more than 95% of violent assaults against women. A 2011 CDC study also shows that men are raped by other men more than 93% of the time, and women are raped by men more than 98% of the time.

    2. Incarceration/Reentry Programs. The purpose of these programs is to recruit violent offenders who are still incarcerated directly from prison, then help them gain custody of victims. It is unclear to me how a child benefits from the dangerous influence of a violent offender insofar as it reduces support to the home they are recovering in. The program paints the offender as the victim and domestic violence as a disease they are afflicted with, curable by the removal of witnesses to their crimes.

    Although violence is a voluntary act, HHS now invested our tax dollars into rehabilitating the incurable who choose to assault the most vulnerable members of society. Studies of male DV perpetrators show that 50% of them are sociopaths and another 25% have sociopathic tendancies. Psychopaths are people who feel no emotional connections to others and have zero regard for the rules and regulations of society, they do not respond to therapy, and cannot be rehabilitated. Dr. Robert Hare reports that psychopaths make up 1% of the general population, but 25% of the prison population:

    "Violence is not uncommon among offender populations, but psychopaths still manage to stand out," he says. "They commit more than twice as many violent and aggressive acts, both in and out of prison, as do other criminals ... The recidivism rate of psychopaths is about double that of other offenders ... The violent recidivism rate of psychopaths is about triple that of other offenders."

    Recipients include:

    • Massachusetts Probation Department: The Probation Department conducts all pre-trial mediations in the MA family courts. As of 2007, the department claims to have helped 1,600 male offenders with their custody cases, including Springfield inmate Shawn Suarezwho was recruited into the custody switching program from jail, was released, won custody, then was sent back to prison on another violation. In 2011 and 2012, several high ranking administrators in the Probation Department were indicted by the DOJ and charged with conspiracy and fraud under the Racketeer, Influence, and Corrupt Organizations Act.
    • Colorado's "Parenting From Prison" received grants to implement programs which recruit violent offenders who are still incarcerated directly from prison, then help them gain custody of children.
    • CT Child Rapist and mass murderer Joshua Komisarjevsky's nine-year old daughter was brought to visit him 55 times while in prison awaiting trial for murdering and raping 11-year old Michaela Petit, and also killing her sister Haley (age 17,) and their mom. Prior to murdering and raping the Petit family, Komisarjevsky gained sole custody of his daughter, who he promptly handed over to his parents to raise. The same parents who he blamed for his crimes after being found guilty of 17 counts, including the three homicides, and sentenced to death.

    3. Foster Care. Despite the fact that the National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect found that children are six times more likely to die in the State's care than those with their parents, it is assumed by some politicians that if you are poor, then you must need the US Department of Health and Human Services programs to tell you what's best for your own family.

    • In 2012, Colorado Governor John Hicklenhooper ordered an overhaul of the State's child welfare system after the Denver Post reported 43 children were murdered as a consequence of social workers who dropped the ball.
    • In 2011, San Francisco Department of Child Protective Services paid out4 million to a former foster child who suffered years of abuse after his sister was beaten and starved to death by the foster parent. Another report showed that more than 1,000 CA foster homes matched the addresses of registered sex offenders, 600 of whom were high risk.
    • This report talks about the 1.5 million mothers who say they were "coerced," "manipulated," and "duped" into handing over their babies for adoption. These women say sometimes their parents forged consent documents, but more often they say these forced adoptions were coordinated by the people their families trusted most... priests, nuns, social workers, nurses or doctors."
    • This report by ABC News reporter Diane Sawyer showed that 25% of all foster kids were on psychotropic drugs, and the States did not do enough to oversee them.

    4. Center for Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. With an annual budget of more than $20 million, the Center gives grants directly to religious groups exempt from anti discrimination laws, such as churches and mosques, as well as nonprofits affliated with them. Often partnered with the above-referenced Fatherhood industry programs, the Partnership's purpose is to "build and support partnerships with faith-based and community organizations in order to better serve individuals, families and communities in need." HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebeliusexplains that:

    "Faith leaders are trusted partners in local communities. You have a unique ability to reach people, especially the most vulnerable, with the tools and information they need to get healthy, stay well, and thrive."

    The consequence of this policy is that unsubsidized secular nonprofits that provide community services such as childcare, education, and healthcare cannot compete with the radical anti-woman nonprofits the Obama administration gives preference to. Examples include:

    • Catholic Charities received $650 million from HHS between 2008-2011, despite the fact that they have lobbied to uphold their discrimination based policies that deny adequate healthcare to women, children, and the LGBT community. This includes policies which refuse women birth control, abortion, and rape counseling to the more than10,600 children allegedly raped by some 4,392 preists as of 2002.
    • Atlanta based New Birth Missionary Baptist Church received $1 million from HHS to support accused pedophile Bishop Eddie Long's $3 million salary and benefits package, as well as anti-gay marriage lobbying efforts. In 2012, the SEC announced charges against his successor, Fatherhood promotor Ephran Taylor who "was actually peddling was a giant Ponzi scheme, one aimed to "swindle over $11 million, primarily from African-American churchgoers," that reached into churches nationwide, from Long's megachurch in Atlanta to Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church congregation in Houston."
    • "Final Defendant Pleads Guilty to Medicaid Fraud in Scheme Involving Homeless and Pregnant Teenagers "(3/22/2012). This press release from the GA Office of the Attorney General regarding God's Promise Center, a business located in Henry County which purported to be a residential treatment program for homeless teenage girls.

    Domestic Violence is a Multibillion Dollar Industry Complete with its own Ambiguous 'Gender Neutral' Lingo Often Causes Victims in Profitably Dangerous Homes.

    The CDC estimated that in 2003 Americans spent $8.3 billion on the domestic violence industry, which does not take into consideration the nearly 8 million work days per year that victims miss as a direct consequence of being assaulted, nor the costs associated with the children they care for who might also be abused. With as much as $585 billion also spent subsidizing the child abuse industry, so it's no wonder some unethical abuse industry professionals cash in by keeping the public in danger and placing children in dangerous homes.

    Wednesday, May 16, 2012

    Speaking of KS Case Managers - Dr. Milfred ‘Bud’ Dale – Submits Amicus To Appellate Court – Case Manager Bud Dale’s Report To Court and his Comments on Private List Serve About the ‘gravy train’ wagon. In His Own words…..


    Dr. Dale Case Manager Report to Court in the Claudine Dombrowski Case;

    “..forcing a battered mother to not complain about sexual and physical abuse - it’s confrontational, and if mommy wants to see child again.. then mommy will do as told.”

    2002 april 2 dr. dale evaluation forensic ordered by court to get mom out of SV from Dec. 2000 ex-parte order

    In Bud Dale’s OWN WORDS Courtesy of TheLizLibrary Psychology in Family Court


    Therapeutic Jurisprudence - What's wrong with our family courts - NNFLP research on custody evaluation practices

    What Litigation Abuse Looks Like! It Boggles The Mind That Each ...

    A Topeka Kansas Evaluation: Teaching the mother to NOT REPORT sexual or physical Abuse: As Ordered by the Courts;

     Dr. Milford “Bud” Dale.


    9. For example, the below commenting MHP — who has been a parenting coordinator (“case manager”)

    on at least one case known to the author in which a severely battered woman lost custody of her daughter to the abusive father,and who regularly performs custody evaluations as well — appears oblivious to the impact of MHP fees (which typically are divided equally between the parents) on a parent with substantially lower income than the other:

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “If you want the parents to cooperate, why not add a provision that they must go back to mediation or to a parent coordinator if they cannot come to an agreement. As long as the mediator or parent coordinator changes a reasonable fee, the financial incentives for the parents to cooperate is maintained (assuming each wants to avoid paying a mediator or parent coordinator) and there is a solution for persistent disagreements that is fair…” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, October 24, 2005).

    More examples:

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “…issues of child support are totally separate from custody and parenting time determinations. Yet in one case… the attorney continually referenced the fact that I was ‘failing to consider and give weight’ to the fact that the father was $20,000 behind in child support… Fortunately, my appointment letter addressed that my role was separate from the financial issues… Indeed, I had not failed to give weight to the financial issues. I had totally ignored and disregarded them all along – because that’s what I was required to do by law. Some attorneys will attempt to backdoor this issue; that is, they will claim that the child support arrearage represents a character flaw or defect – which might or might not be true. By the way, researching the literature about how fathers get so behind in child support yields some interesting claims on both sides of the issue.”(Kansas doctorate-level MHP, February 12, 2006).

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “…issues of child support are totally separate from custody and parenting time determinations. Yet in one case… the attorney continually referenced the fact that I was ‘failing to consider and give weight’ to the fact that the father was $20,000 behind in child support… Fortunately, my appointment letter addressed that my role was separate from the financial issues… Indeed, I had not failed to give weight to the financial issues. I had totally ignored and disregarded them all along – because that’s what I was required to do by law. Some attorneys will attempt to backdoor this issue; that is, they will claim that the child support arrearage represents a character flaw or defect – which might or might not be true. By the way, researching the literature about how fathers get so behind in child support yields some interesting claims on both sides of the issue.”(Kansas doctorate-level MHP, February 12, 2006).

    72.The reason for this has been decades of MHP lobbying and propagandizing to the legislatures and legal community.

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE CALL TO ARMS]: “There is a new bill in the California state legislature which will be of some interest and concern to all of us who do custody evaluations, especially California psychologists. The bill prohibits the use of psychological testing in custody evaluations unless the court grants “a motion for a mental or psychological examination of a parent only for good cause shown…” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “…The legislator is sponsoring this bill on behalf of women’s rights groups, who think that parental alienation is diagnosed too frequently through the use of psychological testing…” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “This bill appears to prohibit considerably more than psych testing… “Controversial, nonscientific labels, such as parental alienation syndrome, parental alienation, or alienated child, are specifically excluded as allowable diagnoses and for court use.” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I am responding from a strategic and tactical point of view. In addition to being a forensic psychologist, doing CCE, I am also legislative chair of the Florida Psychological Association. In my experience…” (Florida doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I’ll go ahead and forward this to her if that’s ok with you.  the annual Legislative and Advocacy day is coming up mid-March, altho I’m guessing they’ve already selected the legislation they want psychologists to discuss with legislators… do you know how far along this bill is in the legislative process… I think CPA’s stand in general is to strongly oppose any bill that limits psychologists’ scope of practice…” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “Perhaps a letter from those of us who write and teach about use of psychological tests in CCEs might be useful?…” (North Carolina doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I agree also and think a letter from professionals that know testing is a great idea.  It seems that if the legislature wants to “do something”  perhaps advocating for  required continuing education of so many hours in order to allow people to use the tests…” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).


    116. As is usually recognized by the MHP, e.g. Pickar, supra, note 66b, but only when convenient or desired. Compare the following.

    The first two commentators are uninterested in acknowledging past financial issues that have wreaked family havoc, and arguably bear on character as well as explain motives and feelings of the parties; the third is interested in supporting a father’s request to relocate, and so believes that it is within his province to gather and analyze data about prospective financial matters:

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “Tax returns?? Simple issues like one parent claimed 4 kids and there are only two, I can probably figure that out and that speaks to honesty and maybe tracking reality. But I agree that we should not be analyzing tax issues. If it is that complex I can’t think how that would be relevant to custody/parenting issues. If it is, both parent provide information and you hire a tax consultant to review it. I can’t imagine what could be relevant… I have a case right now where there are federal indictments on one parent to the tune of over 1/2 millions and all kinds of issues around money. Very little of it is relevant (except possible prison and honesty) and the other parent wants to make it all relevant. She brought me a notebook of financial records. That’s about her anger about the money – which is relevant to know how angry she is at dad and how that affects her children.”(Kansas doctorate-level MHP, November 23, 2005).

    Child Custody Evaluations - Thomas D. Lyon article on the suggestibility of children124. For an example of how background might influence the MHP’s investigation, perceptions and conclusions, see Lisa D. Cromer & Jennifer J. Freyd,What Influences Believing Child Sexual Abuse Disclosures? The roles of depicted memory persistence, participant gender, trauma history, and sexism, 31 Psych. Women Q. 1 (2007). From the abstract: “Men believed abuse reports less than did women, and people who had not experienced trauma were less likely to believe trauma reports. Gender and personal history interacted such that trauma history did not impact women’s judgments but did impact men’s judgments. Men with a trauma history responded similarly to women with or without a trauma history. High sexism predicted lower judgments of an event being abusive. Hostile sexism was negatively correlated with believing abuse disclosures.” The study at the University of Oregon found that “young men who have never been traumatized are the least likely population to believe a person’s recounting of child sexual abuse.” (News release, Believing child sexual abuse claims, U. Or. Univ. News, February 13, 2007, at

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE PRECURSOR]: “I just haven’t noticed higher abilities in hypothesis testing among psychologists or other mental health professionals. I realize that you have to take a couple of courses in research and statistics to get a graduate degree (in most fields). It doesn’t seem to translate into skills in decision-making across the board. E.g. the recent thread on the Kansas custody evaluation and Virginia side trip. Some very off thinking and relevant point missing.
    One might take arguments similar to that you have made and point out that psychologists just aren’t trained as investigators when it comes to obtaining information outside of psychological data (police officers are better.) And that lawyers are better trained at issue spotting and weighing information. And that judges have more experience decision-making.
    I also point out that mental health training does not provide actual information and experience relevant to many of the issues that ought to be considered in a custody determination. For example, the financial aspects. For example, educational opportunities. For example, what it’s like to actually be a parent with day-in and day-out responsibility for children, how the home is run, the pragmatics of life. An unwed childless 28-year-old Ph.D. just out of school probably hasn’t a clue — and I for one see this lack influencing unworkable recommendations.
    I also point out that skill in testing and coming up with psychological diagnoses does not qualify anyone ipso facto to translate that into parenting ability or even to understand with what kind of or which parent a child’s best interests is most likely to be fostered. There is very little translating dsm diagnoses into parenting abilities and child outcomes, especially when neither parent is perfect and foibles and personality defects have to be weighed…” (liz, May 2, 2005).

    124. For an example of how background might influence the MHP’s investigation, perceptions and conclusions, see Lisa D. Cromer & Jennifer J. Freyd, What Influences Believing Child Sexual Abuse Disclosures? The roles of depicted memory persistence, participant gender, trauma history, and sexism, 31 Psych. Women Q. 1 (2007). From the abstract: “Men believed abuse reports less than did women, and people who had not experienced trauma were less likely to believe trauma reports. Gender and personal history interacted such that trauma history did not impact women’s judgments but did impact men’s judgments. Men with a trauma history responded similarly to women with or without a trauma history. High sexism predicted lower judgments of an event being abusive. Hostile sexism was negatively correlated with believing abuse disclosures.” The study at the University of Oregon found that “young men who have never been traumatized are the least likely population to believe a person’s recounting of child sexual abuse.” (News release, Believing child sexual abuse claims, U. Or. Univ. News, February 13, 2007, at

    125. [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE QUERY]: “My 8 year old son is complaining a lot about being bored in school, to the point it seems to be affecting his overall happiness… I experienced similar problems throughout elementary and high school.. Will talk with the school but am seeking ideas to help him cope…” (Doctorate-level MHP father, April 21, 2005).

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “While such “purity balls” are not something that I and my daughters (ages 14 and 12 next week) have ever or would ever participate in, I can indeed tell you that as a father I feel a desire to help protect my daughters from predators and even poor choices on their part.” (Idaho doctorate-level MHP father, April 19, 2006).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I asked my stepdaughter what stores my granddaughter likes… One of the stores she mentioned was Victoria’s Secret. Why would a high school junior want to buy anything in Victoria’s secret? Has it changed in terms of what it sells? I know they all like to dress like streetwalkers, but this is ridiculous.” (Minnesota masters-level MHP mother, February 28, 2005).
    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “School is important for kids… why not look and take the time to get good data from people who see them more than we do? And who see them sometimes more than their parents do. I’m going to stop now and call my son’s school. Seems there is an academic counselor… who is helping my son with sending emails to college soccer coaches. She’s helping my son and deserves my support… the students at school call this counselor, “Momma.” And I know why. Aren’t some kids just luckier than others?” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP father, May 10, 2005).

    …When There Still Isn’t Enough Work, Doing Trainings for Everyone (especially those that push make-work ideas) and Reviewing Other MHPs

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I do CCEs and I function as a court-appointed “Case Manager” in Kansas. Kansas calls parent coordinators “Case Managers” to avoid confusion – lol. I have also twice attended AFCC sponsored training on parent coordination. The Colorado group (Christie Coates, Robert LaCrosse, And Betsy Duvall) did a 2 day training in St. Louis in November, 2003, and Joan Kelly did a 2 day training in Chicago in June 2004. Both of these training programs emphasize the “Divorce Impasse” Model that Janet Johnston put together. This is a model that I find helps in CCEs and parent coordination/case management. The second AFCC task force has just completed its task of developing model standards for parent coordinators (See AFCC website or request backchannel)…” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, May 16, 2005).

    “Do a Bonding Assessment”

    [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I do not know of a research based protocol for a ‘bonding assessment.’ It seems the folks that do them around here do an observation of touching, smiling, eye contact, warm interactions etc which are good and important and look at basic needs and are they met. I was wondering if there are protocols that are considered ‘standard of care’ and or are reseach based.” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, January 14, 2007.)

    For more about the GREAT Dr. Milford “Bud” Dale please visit the following links.


    Therapeutic jurisprudence in the family courts, i.e. a "mental health approach to the law" substitutes the opinions of mental health practitioners for traditional evidence and decision-making procedures. Because these persons actually do not have any kind of "expertise" to opine this way, what originally was thought to be a helpful idea (in this medicalized and psychologized world) has become merely economic opportunism, harming not only the litigants and children in the system as well as the court system itself, but also perverting substantive and procedural law. It is not science, but compensated yenta-ism that has permeated the courts under the pretexts that engineering family affectional relationships is within the ability of mental health "science" practitioners to accomplish, and that this is an appropriate goal of the government, court system, and state police power because children "need" something it has to offer.

    This completely denies the Constitutional Right to a Court of Law governed by FACT.

    Mother Speaks On Case Management Bill

    Source: Topeka Capitol Journal

    Karen Williams, left, and her husband, Stan, talk to the media Tuesday outside the Statehouse. Williams is fighting a Douglas County case manager's decision to restrict access to her daughter, of whom Williams formerly had full custody.  ANDY MARSO/THE CAPITAL-JOURNALExcerpt;

    Karen Williams previously had full custody of her daughter before a case manager appointed by the court to work with her and her ex-husband decided to limit her to one or two hours a week of supervised visitation at a Lawrence facility called The Farm.”

    “Williams says her rights to due process were violated when the judge allowed the new custody arrangement without giving Williams a full hearing to respond to any evidence for the case manager's decision.

    "I still have parental rights, supposedly, but effectively I've been stripped of them," Williams said.

    Williams stopped by the Statehouse on Tuesday after her case was heard by the Kansas Court of Appeals. Continue Reading



     Caesars Ghost A Commenter sums it up well:

    In any other area of law

    In any other area of law "confidential conversations between judges and case managers" would constitute ex parte communications that would subject the parties-- including the Judges-- to disciplinary procedures and possible sanctions. This is a joke to provide such exceptions to the due process rights of either parent, as well as the rights of the children whose custody and visitation is being determined by the court.

    If the Judges don't want to do their job and wish to abdicate their role to "case managers" then perhaps the Judges need to step down and be replaced by Judges who do want to do their job of hearing all of the facts in a case in full light, view and scrutiny of the opposing parties.

    The 6th amendment grants criminals the right to confront their accusers and to be presented with the claims and evidence against them and the right to contest those claims and evidence.

    Why does our legislature grant fewer rights to parents than they do to criminals, pedophiles, murders, etc.? And why are children denied access to parents based on what a case manager says.

    I don't care if the case manager has specialized training in psychology, family therapy, domestic issues or anything else. That specialty gives the case manager nothing more than "expert witness" status constitutionally speaking. It does NOT make that case manager the default judge.

    The best way to fix this is not to revise the statute and required qualifications to serve as a case manager. The best way to fix it would be to repeal the statute that created case managers in the first place and go back to how Kansas handled these cases for nearly a century and a half prior to 2002.

    The whole case manager position never existed in Kansas before 2002, and so it isn't like this is just something that HAS to exist for Courts to function. Instead it is part of the reason courts are NOT functioning for families or for those who believe in due process principles of the Constitution or for those of us who abhor seeing more tax dollars going to create quasi authority figures by turning expert witnesses into defacto unlicensed judges while we continue to pay the salaries of both the abdicating judges and the defacto unlicensed judges.


    Case Managers; Forensic Psychology; Guardians ad Litem; Therapeutic Jurisprudence
    The sociological and psychological research on families and child well-being impacts public policy and the issues of child custody in family law. The research frequently is misrepresented, and mis-cited by mental health professionals, lawyers, forensic psychologists and others, as well as interest groups lobbying for laws. Also review the sections pertaining to the issues impacted by the "therapeutic jurisprudence", such as child custody, parental alienation theory, research pertaining to child development, the subsection for research Myths and Facts in FAMILY LAW, and other family law issues. Also see the subsection on Child Custody in FAMILY LAW. The Therapeutic Jurisprudence index page contains links to recommended off-site locations as well as the on-site articles

    Index: Therapeutic Jurisprudence

  • Are Psychologists Hiding Evidence? A Need for Reform by Lees-Haley and Courtney SCHOLAR
  • Child Custody Evaluations and Measuring Attachment (limited science) by Jean Mercer 2009 PDF SCHOLAR
  • Child sex abuse, the limits of Loftus, and overblowing the memory research LIZNOTES, CITES
  • Children's Associational Rights: Why less is more by Emily Buss PDF SCHOLAR
  • Collaborative Law: What's Wrong with Multidisciplinary Practice? by liz
  • Court-appointed Parenting Evaluators: The Case for Abolition by Margaret Dore PDF SCHOLAR
  • Custody Evaluations: Ten Signs of Questionable Practices by Joel V. Klass, M.D. SCHOLAR
  • Custody evaluators' arguments about test records -- and why they're wrong by liz
  • Custody Evaluators' Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations, U.S. Dept Justice October 31, 2011 PDF SCHOLAR
  • Caveat: recommendations in the above paper are NOT endorsed by
  • Disciplining Divorcing Parents: Social Construction of Parental Alienation by F. Besset PDF SCHOLAR
  • Family Court is Not a Family-Friendly Place by Lisa Marie Macci, Esq.
  • Guardians ad Litem in Custody Litigation: The Case for Abolition by Richard Ducote PDF SCHOLAR
  • Parental Alienation Syndrome -- getting it wrong in child custody cases by Carol S. Bruch PDF SCHOLARChildren Need. . . THIS? A custody evaluation by Martha C. Jacobson, sadistic and stupid PAS 'therapy' by Laura C. Hohnecker
  • Parenting Coordination Issues by liz
  • Psychiatric experts assess parental alienation by David Crary
  • Psychology in Court: A Trial Within a Trial by liz
  • Psychology in Court: The Detectives by liz
  • Psychology in Court:The Diagnosticians by liz
  • Psychology in Court: Discovery of Test Data by liz
  • Psychology in Court: How to Respond to the MMPI-2 by liz
  • Reevaluating the Evaluators (overview of the problem) by liz CITATIONS TO RESEARCH
  • Custody Evaluator Quotes by liz (companion to above article)
  • Signs of a Bad Custody Evaluation by Joel V. Klass, M.D. SCHOLAR
  • Socialization, Personality Development, and the Child's Environments by Judith Rich Harris SCHOLAR
  • Sound Research or Wishful Thinking in Custody Cases? by Carol S. Bruch PDF SCHOLAR
  • Stupidity Inherent in Promoting Supervised Visitation Centers by liz
  • Troubling Admission of Supervised Visitation Records in Court by Stern/Oehme PDF SCHOLAR
  • What Does the Guardian ad Litem do in Family Court? by liz
  • Warren Farrell Does a Custody Evaluation by liz
  • What's Wrong with Parenting Coordination by liz
  • Why "Therapeutic Jurisprudence" Must Be Eliminated From Our Family Courts by liz
  • Why "Therapeutic Jurisprudence" Must Be Eliminated From Our Courts by liz (pub. version)
  • Critical Assessment of Child Custody Evaluations by Emery, Otto, Donohue off-site PDF SCHOLAR
  • Kansas Mother Karen Williams Fight for Daughter Could Change Case Managers and other ‘Therapeutic Jurisprudence’ Laws in Kansas

    Therapeutic Jurisprudence - 3rd party ‘Access to Justice’ deniers - Fathers Rights, SHARIA style to take his property.

    Another Great Exposure Report on the Injustices of Mothers via Court Appointed Case Managers, parenting coordinators, Custody Evaluators et el.

    "Supervised visitation also is used as a first step toward a custody switch away from protective mothers to abusive fathers.''

    Fight for Daughter Could Change Law in Kansas

    Topeka, Kan. — A mother said her daughter was taken away from her and she’s never been allowed her day in court to fight for her child. The woman’s story has now inspired lawmakers to look into what they can do to change the system.

    Karen Williams  went to the Kansas Appellate Court arguing that her constitutional rights were violated when a Douglas County judge removed her daughter from her custody all based on the word of a court appointed case manager. The case manager suggested to the judge that there was “probable abuse.” Continue Reading

    “Kansas Representative Joe Patton (R-Topeka) wants to change the law to require educational standards for case managers…..”

    Joe Patton, “Shame on you”. You are an attorney for goodness sake. LAW, FACT, COURT – What part is not clear about this? FACTs only NOT ideas or the ‘Therapeutic Jurisprudence’s’ - OPINION, Theory, Personal Belief System, Societal Culture, ‘Philosophy’ - an ‘Idea’ -a-could-be-might-be 16th century witch DoktoR – voo-doo-thinking ‘get a stick and beat it to death’ mentality, who have created for their selves, HIGH Paying Jobs Where NONE should exist to begin with. None.

    The "Trial Within a Trial" Court-Appointed, Case Managers, Custody Evaluators et el. Waste Judicial Resources and Parents' Funds

    The primary reason psychologists and other mental health professionals should be banned from the family court systems, except to answer limited and narrowly-defined questions actually within their expertise, is that their presence does not add value, but rather, wastes court, lawyer, and litigant time, money and resources.

    Parenting Evaluation, Parenting Plans...
    Reevaluating the Evaluators: “Rethinking the Assumptions of Therapeutic Jurisprudence in the Family Courts”

    A call for a revolt altogether against the notion of "therapeutic jurisprudence" -- which has been proved to do little to benefit children, much to benefit the divorce industry, much to complicate and pervert our family laws, much to erode fundamental rights and liberties, and much to harm the families who become trapped in the system. There are many problems, of course. But they are symptoms. Step one is to get the agent of most of them out of our family courts. The Emperor has no clothes.

    Lawyer Conflict: MHP’s and “therapeutic jurisprudence” ultimately must be – and will be – taken out of the family courts.

    Lawyers' unacknowledged conflicts are destroying the quality of family law representation. One of the problems with the rise of therapeutic jurisprudence and the placement of non-legal systems into the courts is the subtle denigration of long-established precepts of lawyer independence and due process. One of the multiple ways this happens in the family courts is through the common development of multidisciplinary collegial relationships and business referral.

    Children need. . . THIS? standards and practices in child custody evaluations

    DOJ Study: Child Custody Evaluators' Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations- Their Relationship to Evaluator Demographics, Background, Domestic Violence - Knowledge and Custody-Visitation Recommendations Final Technical Report Submitted to the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice

    Parenting Coordination, a bad idea

    • Parenting coordination is an inappropriate delegation of the judicial function
    • Parenting coordination is an impediment to court access
    • Parenting coordination is a denial of due process
    • Parenting coordination violates privacy
    • The parenting coordinator concept encroaches on family liberty interests
    • Parenting coordination represents arbitrary dictate by a person, in denigration of rule of law
    • Parenting coordination is a make-work role newly invented by psychology trade promotion groups
    • No studies indicate parenting coordinators make good decisions
    • No studies indicate parenting coordination improves families' lives or child wellbeing.
    • Nothing qualifies a stranger to make family decisions for other people
    • Nothing qualifies a mental health professional to interpret a court order or legal document
    • Nothing qualifies a lawyer to play at being an unlicensed, unregulated therapist for hire
    • Nothing qualifies any third party to "fill in the gaps" in someone else's contract
    • There is no definition of what constitutes a successful parenting coordination
    • Parenting coordination does not, in the long run, alleviate court docket congestion
    • It creates additional issues and leaves the door open for return trips to resolve them
    • Parenting coordination provides a new forum for squabbling over petty disputes
    • Parenting coordination is an additional expense that many can ill afford
    • Parenting coordination enables one parent to spend the other's funds
    • Parenting coordination is time-consuming and tedious
    • Parenting coordination is not confidential
    • Parenting coordination constitutes continuous government discovery, 4th Amendment
    • Parenting coordination constitutes continuous discovery by each parent into the affairs of the other
    • Parenting coordination can never be "voluntary" because it implements unwanted court orders
    • Parenting coordinators demand that the parties sign "consents" that give up constitutional rights
    • Some have demanded that parties give up the right to go to court, contact police, or involve their lawyers
    • They are hired or appointed under shadow of the threat of court sanctions or loss of custody
    • They are agreed to by parties ignorant of the repercussions, in fear, out of funds, or overwhelmed
    • Parenting coordination does not result in increased family well-being
    • Parenting coordination does not make children happier, healthier, or better adjusted
    • Parenting coordination is not therapy but coercion backed by the state's police power
    • Parenting coordinators tend to be hostile to, and at odds with attorney-client relationships
    • They align with GALs and other court appointees in a pretext of "focus on the children"
    • They encroach on parental-child relationships and decision-making
    • They undermine the parental authority children require for a sense of security and well-being
    • Instead of at least one authoritative parent, children have no authoritative parent
    • Petty tyrants place a premium on the perception of who is cooperating with them
    • Cooperation with the parenting coordinator is court-ordered and
    • They alone decide if a parent is "cooperating" with them
    • They are given unwarranted authority to impose or recommend sanctions against parents
    • They are given unwarranted authority to speak with extended family, friends, and collaterals
    • They are given unwarranted authority to speak with children, teachers, and school officials
    • They are given authority to demand private medical and therapy records
    • They are able continuously to undermine the credibility and competence of parents to third parties
    • They are able continuously to divulge private family issues to third parties
    • They are given authority to demand meetings, and meeting times and places
    • There are no studies of parenting coordination methods or techniques
    • There is no research into parenting coordinators' efficacy, and there cannot be
    • Decisions are based on the parenting coordinator's private agendas, values, and beliefs
    • Most parenting coordinators lack psychological insight
    • Parenting coordination is not "co-parenting therapy" which rarely works anyway
    • Mental health professionals are ignorant of the repercussions in law of their ideas
    • There is no valid "training" because there is no body of knowledge to base training on
    • Decisions are made without actual knowledge of people's households and daily lives
    • Parenting coordination provides a forum for the arguing of minutiae, not just major decisions
    • Parenting coordinators frequently make bad decisions
    • The parenting coordinator has absolutely no incentive to work himself or herself out of a job
    • Parenting coordinators tend to be individuals who can't make a go of practicing their profession
    • Many have axes to grind; others need to re-live and normalize their own family-of-origin issues
    • Parenting coordination is unregulated and practicably unable to be regulated
    • There is no effective oversight, and there cannot be
    • There is no recourse against the parenting coordinator for malfeasance or malpractice
    • Parenting coordinators have control to self-generate their work and churn fees
    • The claim of parenting coordinators that they sought this role in order to "help" people is specious
    • Parenting coordination proceedings are informal, outside court, and not subject to effective oversight
    • Parenting coordinators can report conversations and events differently from how they really happened
    • Parenting coordinators can cover themselves by blaming parents for the failure of the venture
    • Parenting coordinators can and do give parents make-work at whim
    • Parenting coordinators may not have any personal parenting experience
    • Parenting coordinators may not have experience being primary caregivers, or as single parents
    • Many of those drawn to the field are by nature meddlers, incompetents, or petty tyrants
    • Parenting coordination is dangerous, founded on erroneous beliefs about "high conflict"
    • Parenting coordination is a tool to force fit parents and children to invest in abusers' rehabilitation
    • "High conflict" means "abusive relationship", not "difficult learning situation"
    • "High conflict" means "threats to security and well-being", not "lack of communication skills"
    • Fears and concerns are real, not irrational, vindictive, or merely personality disordered
    • "High conflict" means that the "parenting plan" is inappropriate, unjust, unhealthy, or unsafe, and
    • there is no "adjustment period" to get through or equal "co-parenting relationship" to regain
    • Parenting coordinators have missed domestic violence
    • Parenting coordinators have inflamed emotions and exacerbated legal issues
    • Parenting coordinators have assumed facts that are not true
    • · Parenting coordinators have perceived emergencies or situations incorrectly
    • Parenting coordinators have mischaracterized events
    • Parenting coordinators have made egregious judgmental mistakes
    • Parenting coordinators have lied outright
    • There is no basis to presume their "good faith" or their "neutrality"
    • There are no ethical guidelines that practicably can be enforced
    • There are, and can be, no enforceable practice parameters, only vague aspirational generalities
    • Parenting coordinators will be biased because of the nature of human relationships and the role
    • Court oversight is illusory because the parenting coordinator has more credibility than either parent
    • Court oversight is illusory because the parenting coordinator has the ear of the judge, and
    • because the parenting coordinator has relationships with supportive guardians ad litem, and
    • because the parenting coordinator has other courthouse referral relationships who will back him or her
    • Court oversight is illusory because it's easy to claim a parent is uncooperative or lying
    • Court oversight is illusory because it's expensive
    • or there is not enough time to get a hearing
    • or the party doesn't have a lawyer post-decree, and
    • because the judge who appointed the parenting coordinator did so because he didn't want to hear it
    • Most of all, parenting coordination is proof that joint custody does not work

    Therapeutic Jurisprudence – Child Trafficking via family Courts. It’s monetary. It's all about their money and the "gravy train" ride. THEY MUST BE ELIMINATED FROM ALL FAMILY COURTS!!

    You cannot ‘PREDICT’ or see in any “Crystal Ball”. It is not FACT and these Case Managers, Guardian Ad Litem’s, Parenting Coordinators, Co-parenting, Shared Parenting, SUPERVISED VISITATION and ACCESS VISITATION Centers should have NEVER been allowed into the Kansas Courts to begin with! It is all Therapeutic Jurisprudence that denies ‘Access to Justice’. It does not matter, in fact will only ‘entrench’ these NON Fact – Pseudo Science, self serving Profiteers with ‘god’ like authority if you Give them a simple pedigree in B.S. crystal ball reading experts forced, CAPTIVE litigants to hire by the Court of Law and Fact. You still have the same thing as you do with a non licensed A$$hole. Oxymoron. Allow the Judge to ‘Judge’ not anyone else. If these people want to ‘judge’ rule and play god in an already EGO ruled Entitlement Family Court then let them become ‘Judges’.

    Opinions only - None are based in any FACT—A Court of Law, must be FACT. The difference between non licensed and licensed ‘carnival crystal ball reading – theory, assumption, future predicting based on their own personal beliefs’ is the PRICE they charge.

    The Amicus Brief by the one Dr. Milfred 'Bud' Dale Amicus Brief - Karen Williams- Case Managers Kansas – EXPERT of the experts for hire by the experts- forensic PROFESSIONAL expert - in the end is still just ‘one man’s personal opinions’, self interest, extremely profitable and continuing expenses for his ‘captive’ clients. This completely denies the Constitutional Right to a Court of Law governed by FACT.

    (I know this first hand) 

    (KS) Dr. Dale and Pedophile Dr. Gardner: Similarities Engaged

    A Topeka Kansas Evaluation: Teaching the mother to NOT REPORT sexual or physical Abuse: As Ordered by the Courts;


    Topeka Kansas Evaluation: Teaching the mother to NOT REPORT sexual or physical Abuse: As Ordered by the Courts;

    by Dr. Milford “Bud” Dale.

    then see below same? hmm……

    Overview of Dr. Richard Gardner’s Opinions

    on Pedophilia and Child Sexual Abuse

    Richard A. Gardner, M.D., is the creator of the creator and main proponent for Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) theory. Prior to his suicide, Gardner was an unpaid part-time clinical professor of child psychiatry at the College of Physicians and Surgeons at Columbia University . He made his money mainly as a forensic expert.

    Get rid of them. The best interest of the child is to remain with their primary attachment figure (usually their mothers) stop ripping the hearts and the lives out of these mothers and her children, by the highly profitable lucrative ‘industry’ of Case managers, Guardian Ad Litems, et other 3rd party ‘Justice’ interferers.